axel

SMDb is the current european version of the SMQV. It is limited to 50 mW output power. I think it is fully compatible with US Versions of any 400 mode Lectro receivers. But don't use European receivers with US type transmitters, that combo is not fully functional.

hi Vas, very curious, too I am hoping for the baby to arrive next week. pleaaase, Aaton! I want to switch over to record my ongoing TV series on Cantar X3 from May 26 onwards. I'll keep you informed...

hey, thanks for this video. hope to hold this baby in my hands soon.

I googled, X3 is 3,55 kilos without batts, 4 kgs with 2 batts attached. I know your SX-R4 is one fourth of it :-) with a full load of Rx and acessories you carry around 7-8 kgs on the front. But with the batteries on the back the weight is well balanced. from tomorrow I will shoot a doc in Turkey with Cantar X1 - same weight - and I love to use it.

I think X3's portability will mostly depend on how much energy it needs. But weight wise it is playing in the same league with 788T/CL8, 664, 688...

imo this bag does not look like it was designed for Cantar. If accessories (RF receivers) are put in front of the Cantar, the access to the inputs will be blocked. the left side flap must remain open to access the the rotary selector. It should at least fold down in the middle. The mesh devider blocks the fader panel... Cantar is not a brick style recorder and it requires a different bag concept. But I think all bags designed for X1/X2 versions will remain pretty usable also with X3.

I am really satisfied with my SX-R4, but it is limited as it has no mixing capabilities. So I am very curious what is the new mixing philosophy behind the SX-R4+. From Charles Tomaras I understood like preamps are recorded directly without further amplification (?), which would mean very low ISO tracks. This approach presents a mighty mix against shy ISOs which is a good presentation for our mix, but for post it would be quite a step to go into ISO level. I wonder how they will like the concept. For my on-set mix up to these days I have tried to get decent levels on my ISOs and only attenuate them mixing them together. I like the idea to mix = to let gradually go, what I dont need. Maybe it is something weird, but the other way round I always end up in the output limiters, out of control. But with a machine like the SX-R4+ my whole mixing system won't work anymore. How do all of you feel against this concept? Or did I get something wrong? And thanks by the way for all the pics and videos!!!

old R4 TC clock: Pierre from Sonosax told me, that the (old) R4 TC generator is part of it's mainboard. No complaints since the 4.1xx update (2012?). Until then the clock was very accurate like 0,02 frames in 6 hs even in the very cold, I actually tested it in the freezer when I got it. But before software 4.1x there were intermittent faults of far more than one frame during some shoots. R4 preamps are still great. And it is so lightwight and energy efficient. I am curious about that new new concept of mixing without input trims. Does this mean isos around -40dBFS?

A charger should be included with any new Cantar X3. I guess it will be this one. X3's batteries show a few Whs extra compared to similar sized Audioroot batts, lets see if they can be exchanged with Audioroot's batts and chargers

I did not test exterior, just swinging the boom int. pretty fast with bare mic with and without windshield/foam which is a key application for me. Maybe thats why I did not experience this "overload of preamp stage" and the conclusion was made too soon? best, Axel

I had the chance to test the 8017 C last year for my Austrian friend Roland and I did some A/B testing against a Senngheiser 8060 and a Neumann KMR 81. I don't own a CMIT, would have been informative, too: http://www.axeltraun.at/downloads.html You can download the testfiles from my homepage, it's a zip file on the bottom of the page, containing 4 tests, sorry my blahblah on the tracks is entirely german: Test setup was 788T with CL9, Tracks A/B, same settings on each channel, both mics attached to the UH400a Lectros. It was a day off from a shoot and I used the shooting setup. Those are the MP3 tracks (48 khz, sorry) : "1_dpa4017li_vs_Senn8060re_48khz" dpa 8017C left vs Sennheiser 8060 right: first 5 or so minutes are with equal gain settings, resulting the 8017 is -8dB lower compared to the 8060, later I put up the gain of the DPA. If you got an A/B monitoring option for the left and right tracks of an mp3 you can pretty well compare the sound in several situations. If you are unsure what it is about, please ask. The result in short is: 8060 shows more sibilance, but without the brutal fizzling of the older MKH 416 sister mic; it has more punch, peels voices out of their surrounding, makes them sound a littler bigger than life in the closeup, even in 1,5 meters over head (5 ft) it still can deliver closeup sound, provided the room acoustics is OK. I very much like it for the TV shows I am doing. 8017 is more neutral and elegant, almost no center/side, On/OFF effect within 15 deg aberration from the axis, going further OFF axis than about 50 deg there comes a sudden drop in level. 4017 for me is very well suited for calm environments, good for a fast boom op to get all the voices with one mike, has more the feel of a short hypercardioid over a shotgun. The voices sound slimmer and elegant. less punch. "2_dpa4017li_vs_Senn8060re_beide_mit_WS+Wind_48khz" Same mics, same setup, this time it is about wind and handling noise: The DPA copes way better with wind, even with NO foam attached to the mic I can swing the boom quite fast. The 8060 is very susceptible to wind noise. It's genuine foam heavily alters the sound, I can tell if the boom operator has the foam attached to his mike, without AB-ing or seing it. In a Rycote basket with windjammer the 8060 is still prone to wind noise. DPA 8017 is another class . "3_dpa4017_li_vs_NeumKMR81i_re_48khz" The DPA 4017 delivers 2 dB more gain than the KMR 81i, on this test initially the low pass filter on the 4017 is activated for a little more sibilance. 4017 sounds like a little more open. In the begin of the test the mics are separated by 10 cm, after 2:30 I moved the mics on the same axis one over the other. Low pass of the DPA is turned off at 4:30, resulting the KMR81 presenting more sibilance than 4017. DPA 4017 with low pass is like Neumann KMR81 with flat setting (no low pass available). The neumann is more susceptible to cable issues and interference, DPA 4017 behaves very straightforward and error free. at 9:30 the plug on tx are exchanged which finds me confused which mic is which channel (A/B sides change, but I did not aknowledge it during the test) "4_Plugonvergleich_mit_2x_8060_48khz" left/right track A/B comparison of my two UH 400 plug on transmitters mounted with 2 identical sennheiser 8060: outcome in short: equipped with the same type of mics they are equally sounding and deliver equal gain.

Just for in case somebody ever needs this solution: It is possible to provide 12 V DC from the Lectrosonics Octopack to an amplified Antenna (here: ALP 650) through an HF 4 way splitter: Sennheiser ASP 114 does the Job. http://en-us.sennheiser.com/asp-114 According to specs the splitter attentuates the signal by about 8 dB, you need to set the Antenna jumpers accordingly. What it is for: For the next job I will use 2 wireless Booms and up to 9 wireless Lavs, all Lectrosonics. I will work most times from the cart, but need to be mobile in case. On the cart I want to feed 4x SRa and SRb units in the Octopack and 3 additional 411a units in the same bag with the 2 x ALP 650 HF signals. I found the Lectrosonics recommended HF Splitters like ZFSC41 block the 12 V DC, that can be provided by the Octopack. I wanted to avoid the cable mess of 2 additional Bias T units with DC cables between the splitters and the antennas just for powering both ALP 650s. Now I got a ASP 114 and tested it: Antenna distro works, same with Antenna powering in the opposite direction. Although the Sennheiser ASP114 unit is significantly bigger than it's Lectro recommended ZFSC41 counterpart, the whole setup will result same size and less complicated. Pricewise both solutions (Bias T + ZFSC41/ASP 114) are about the same.

first time I looked into the donate thread, here are my 20 $ for this year. I am glad there is a site like this! all the best to you, Jeff

you can come over to 23 rd district and we can have a coffee. I got two 8060s and we can compare your mic to them, if u like. www.axeltraun.at